Some things I don't understand about this movie

[deleted]

1) Why not cast Snipes and Statham together? Do they always have to be in fighting movies? Statham was in THE BANK JOB, SNATCH, etc. Wesley was in Jungle Fever and the waterdance.

2) They weren't trying to hide the partner York. That's the entire point. They want you to be thinking it's the partner b/c eventually it would help the twist that it's Statham all along. Make it obvious one way get them looking one way and then blind side them. I watched the DVD with dir. commentary. They made this film in 2004, before WS's career went south and before JS was as big as he is now. The film was caught up in the legal mess that is David Bergstein and Ron Tutor. The dir admits the twist is not as strong as it could've been b/c when the film finally got released, Statham was the film's biggest star. When they were shooting, Phillippe and Snipes were bigger names.

But the whole point was to make you question where York is, build your thoughts towards him (Snipes - the bigger name) so you'd forget about Statham. First is York working with Snipes somehow and then when you realize they're the same guy, the very next scene Phillippe has a confrontation with him.

3) In a hostage situation, special circumstances are common. If the guy holding hostages asks to speak to someone, they'll usually oblige. that's the whole key to the plan. York asks for Conners, Swat defers to Conners, like the Capt said, it's rare, but happens. You're nit-picking here. If you were a Captain, and to prevent people from dying all you had to do was get a guy on the phone you'd do it. And when the Capt does comes to get him, Conners refuses unless he's reinstated and in charge. So they do it. The film was careful to go over every beat fairly detailed. I have caught the film on TV and there were several edits for time I noticed, so perhaps they "jumped" over things that are definitely in the film.

THE USUAL SUSPECTS gets all this acclaim for being the great twist ending film. That film completely does not work. It's cool while the music is happening and all the quick edits, but...(1) they show you Gabriel Byrne is shot by someone in the first minute of the film. And then entire film, even up to the first (fake) climax that Bryne is Soze. But we know he was shot. They show every single person on the boat killed, but never show Verbal - because he was hiding.

Only a retarded monkey didn't know Verbal Kint was Keyser Soze.

I enjoyed CHAOS for what it was. When I saw it several years ago, I enjoyed it. I'm not trying to pick a fight, but I just think you're nit-picking a bit too much. I've seen cop films that stretch/break the rules a ton worse without at least acknowledging they're doing it like CHAOS. I think it was authentic. Like Phillippe grabbing the guy's helmet before he takes off. The "cool" thing to do, would've been to just ride the bike, sans helmet, right? Like what happens in almost every Bruckheimer film. Here, you're saying the Conners in charge moment was not authentic even though the script and characters acknowledge it. If they didn't acknowledge it, then you can have an issue, but they say it first. It's not fair to rip them for it.

Rip george Lucas for ending Star Wars ep3 the way he did... So the Empire will be searching the galaxy high and low for Darth's children... so we'll hide one with his uncle (and keep the name Skywalker - not too obvious) and the girl we'll hide with the one family in the universe that everyone knows cannot have children. We're supposed to believe now that Darth Vader can sense Obi Wan a few miles away in Star Wars 4, but Darth can't tell he's standing 2 inches from his daughter at the start of Ep4?

Those are script problems.